[BlaqWhole]

Originally Posted by Zeke.Malvo

You should quote where he says these things. That's what the quote button is for, otherwise you're just making up you're own argument.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

Your.

[Zeke.Malvo]

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

Your.

That's not my only mistake in there, grammar police. But you just helped prove my point.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

[Zeke.Malvo]

Originally Posted by waterman

I have not been following this thread until this evening.

The opinions and facts expressed on this page (60) alone are well worth the price of admission. Kudos to BlaqWhole, metros11, crankaholic (love me some Savagegeese), JamesNoBrakes, Mr. Wyndham and hotlap. It is my distinct privilege to hang on this forum with gentlemen of this caliber, well knowing in the ways of high performance automotive propulsion. Then again, it could be the Knob Creek talking.

To bad that there can't be an honest and balanced exchange of ideas like this on Capitol Hill... Oh sh*t, did I just say that?

BRAVO!

Mr. Wyndham is a knowledgeable dude, but throwing BlaqHole in the same sentence with him really diminishes your post.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

[SSfriendly]

Originally Posted by Quinten_33

The GT lines up with the 1SS, PP1 lines up with 1SS(with Active suspension or NPP, but not both), PP2 lines up with 1SS1LE, Bullit lines up with 2SS1LE. The GT350R and GT350 are completely different animals than the ZL1 and ZL1 1LE, and they attract different buyers.

As for the aftermarket companies you listed, There’s companies like Yenko, Katech, Vengeance and Callaway for the Camaro. NO CAR IN AMERICA HAS MORE AFTERMARKET SUPPORT THAN THE CHEVROLET CAMARO. But that doesn’t matter, because we’re talking about the manufactures here.

If that were the case, then why has GM been talking about creating a stripped down 1SS with all season tires to compete with the GT? http://www.roadandtrack.com/new-cars...amaro-ss-base/

While the chevy small block may rule the roost with aftermarket options, the mustang is king of the hill with overall options. It’s been this way since the foxbody…perhaps longer. I’m not sure why you’d try to argue this, it’s common knowledge to most.

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

You did. And you never once expressed that sentiment until AFTER the GT PP1 got toasted. And even after you went on about the 1 mile bottom of the river run on dirt and sand and gravel. You spouted off because you honestly thought it would be a good match up with the extra hp and other goodies. And now after it loses is when you start talking about how you never expected it to win and how Ford doesn't care about performance. Now, all of a sudden. You lingered on this forum all this time only because you thought it would win or at least put up a decent fight. And your only face save is to say that you never thought it had a chance which I call bullshit. You hoped it would and that is evident by all your posts. When the PP2 gets it's ass kicked you'll go right back to this same argument. That Ford doesn't care about performance and you never thought it had a chance.

Post 57, long before the H2H was published…

Originally Posted by SSfriendly

Of course it can't, the tire size/width alone give the 1LE a significant advantage.

Man, it’s always fun proving you wrong….thanks for the opportunity.

Here is a challenge…find a single person, mustang or non either here or in the mustang forums that thought the PP1 would stand a chance in hell against the SS1LE. Good luck!

Originally Posted by Zeke.Malvo

You should quote where he says these things. That's what the quote button is for, otherwise you're just making up you're own argument.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

Haha, he won’t be able to…so he’ll continue to just make things up to fit his opinions as he always does.

Originally Posted by Zeke.Malvo

Mr. Wyndham is a knowledgeable dude, but throwing BlaqHole in the same sentence with him really diminishes your post.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

Indeed.

[newmoon]

Originally Posted by Gen6_1Le

At least Chevy cares enough to build cars like ZL1 1le , if the GT500 can't beat the Zl1 1Le its a fail . And i would bet it won't . Ford just don't care enough.

So is the ZL1-1LE a fail if the 500 smokes it in: 0-60, 1/8, 1/4, 1-mile, top end, street, roll, ride quality, comfort, etc, etc? You know all the stuff that is important in a street car, which is what you are purchasing. Or should Ford give all that up to make sure the 500 can run a Ring Lap?

Also is the present manual ZL1 or ZL1-1LE a failure because it can't match the straight line performance of the 13/14 GT-500?

[BlaqWhole]

Originally Posted by Zeke.Malvo

That's not my only mistake in there, grammar police. But you just helped prove my point.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by Zeke.Malvo

Mr. Wyndham is a knowledgeable dude, but throwing BlaqHole in the same sentence with him really diminishes your post.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

The main thing that influences your opinion of me is the negative things I've said about the Mustang. That is what burns you up. Even tho I also gave the Mustang more compliments than probably anyone else here. Look, you don't have to like me. I don't care if you do or don't. But don't sit here lying and acting like I said anything that wasn't true. I gave the Mustang credit where it was due. And I shitted on it where it sucked. Find me one post where I said anything about the performance of any of the Mustangs that was untrue. The problem is that you just can't take reading it the way I write it. It just burns you up.

Originally Posted by SSfriendly

Man, it’s always fun proving you wrong….thanks for the opportunity.

Yea? Like you did here (see below)

Originally Posted by SSfriendly

On the street...in drag mode, I can see the GT beating the camaro.

You really proved me wrong there...

Originally Posted by SSfriendly

Post 57, long before the H2H was published…

That was the only intelligent thing you've said here.

[BlaqWhole]

Originally Posted by newmoon

So is the ZL1-1LE a fail if the 500 smokes it in: 0-60, 1/8, 1/4, 1-mile, top end, street, roll, ride quality, comfort, etc, etc? You know all the stuff that is important in a street car, which is what you are purchasing. Or should Ford give all that up to make sure the 500 can run a Ring Lap?

Ford would have their work cut out for them if the GT500 is going to do all that. I doubt it will. Maybe it'll beat the Zs in the quarter if it comes with an auto trans option and if it comes with a good tire. Around a track? I doubt it. Braking? I doubt it. And then of course you'd have to factor in the price and options. If it comes in at $75K then it damn well better beat the Zs at something if not everything. If it doesn't then that would be an epic failure.

Originally Posted by newmoon

Also is the present manual ZL1 or ZL1-1LE a failure because it can't match the straight line performance of the 13/14 GT-500?

Well the 13-14 GT500 had more HP, less weight, and a solid rear. So it should be faster. Despite that it was within a driver's race if you compare the fastest official GT500 time to the fastest official ZL1 time. But which one brakes better? Which one corners better? Which one has more options? The GT500 outside of a straight line is no match for the 6th Gen ZL1...not taking anything away from it but I am saying that because you brought it up.

[Bluecyclone]

This thread is amusing, I enjoy the R&D for all manufacturers and driving a spirited sports car is one of the most interesting things I have ever done. As a novice driver I wish to learn all I can about road & track capabilities and fun with these F1 "paddles" keeps me grinning from ear to ear daily.

[SSfriendly]

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

Yea? Like you did here (see below)

You really proved me wrong there...

You sure are great about taking words out of context. Only the A10 has drag mode, which (had you paid attention) is what I was referring. These have yet to be tested against each-other.

You'll also notice this was not a discussion in any way about the 1LE, but rather about the SS vs PP1.

Try again though.

[Chadicus]

Originally Posted by newmoon

So is the ZL1-1LE a fail if the 500 smokes it in: 0-60, 1/8, 1/4, 1-mile, top end, street, roll, ride quality, comfort, etc, etc? You know all the stuff that is important in a street car, which is what you are purchasing. Or should Ford give all that up to make sure the 500 can run a Ring Lap?

Also is the present manual ZL1 or ZL1-1LE a failure because it can't match the straight line performance of the 13/14 GT-500?

No. The ZL1 1LE is a track car and probably 20k cheaper than the GT 500. The 500 better be seriously fast in a straight line or it will be a failure. And if it's close to 100k (ADM included) then it will compete with a ZR1 in which case fail.

[SSfriendly]

Originally Posted by Chadicus

No. The ZL1 1LE is a track car and probably 20k cheaper than the GT 500. The 500 better be seriously fast in a straight line or it will be a failure. And if it's close to 100k (ADM included) then it will compete with a ZR1 in which case fail.

It's going to have ADM, and it's going to sell out. It sucks for regular buyers, but unless Ford steps in and attempts to do something about it, it's going to happen. Don't blame Ford, blame greedy dealerships and those with too much money for their own good.

[whiteboyblues2001]

Originally Posted by crankaholic

Well this is an interesting thread...



I think you're misunderstanding what a spoiler does, it's not creating down-force... it's adjusting the aerodynamic profile of the rear to minimize/eliminate lift. That doesn't increase drag like a down-force generating wing would. The front splitter is moving air around the car and creating lower pressure underneath the car, helping create down-force. Whether this creates extra drag, and how much, depends on how the rest of the car handles air moving around it. I think the Camaro is just less aerodynamic because of it's shape and extra cooling abilities, that creates more aerodynamic drag. The wider tires hurt rolling resistance as well.


Those tires were another huge difference in this comparison. However, tires are nothing if the chassis can't locate them properly... they're useless if the suspension components can't keep them on the ground and pointing in the right direction.


I think the Mustang chassis (that's platform and suspension components) just aren't advanced enough to provide the level of performance an Alpha platform car was designed for. You have to understand that the Mustang is bespoke for Ford and they have to be able to sell the the thing from a $20k EcoBoost grocery-getter, all the way up to the GT500. GM is going after Euro luxury/performance cars with Cadillac, and they spent A LOT of money to develop a platform that will get them there. Luckily for us they also decided to base the Camaro on that platform. The CTS-V (closest relative) is meant to go up against M5s, E63s and Panamera Turbos... cars that cost over $100,000 in some cases. Anyone who's seen the underside of the Camaro knows just how much aluminum is in the front and how advanced it all is.

I think GM saved money as well, that's especially evident in the rear suspension... the car could have been even lighter if they used aluminum for the rear subframe and control arms. But judging by the lap times, spending so much $ on the rear-end would bring diminished returns. It just has to be able to not flex like a noodle under power.


There's a youtube car review channel I watch, the guy does great reviews... I've linked the underbody sections of the GT, GT350 and ZL1 1LE (same front end as the SS, except for the DSSVs, unlike the Mustangs). Looking underneath the front end will show you exactly why the Camaro is good.


(edit: looks like time stamped links are wonky... start at 04:12)



(edit: 05:00)



(edit: 14:16)




I really like the GT350, R and regular. I would have bought one if they weren't marked up to the moon. As time goes on though, I realize more and more that the Camaro is built on a better platform. Lap times are just evidence of that.

Does anyone know if PP2 will feature steering knuckles from the GT350? It's actually where I think Ford is going wrong. Once they developed the GT350, they should have given all the new components to the PP2 GT and taken away the more expensive components as you went down the trim levels. People bough the Shelbys for the name and engine, most of the current owners wouldn't have cared that those chassis components were made available on the GT. They wouldn't have bought a GT anyway.

I think everyone is getting way off the original point with regards to the aero of the two cars, and how it effects the H2H test.

Aerodynamic drag was brought up, because there were claims that the reason the Mustang pulled ahead after the 1/4 mile in the mile race was due to DHOC vs. OHV, and that the DHOC engine pulled more at the top.

The original point was that at speeds over 100 MPH, aero IN GENERAL becomes what you are fighting with HP, not as much weight.

In the 1/4 mile, the power to weight ratio will give you a good idea of what the trap speed should be (at least the neighborhood).

With the 3/4 of a mile after the first 1/4 mile in the 1 mile race, power to aerodynamic drag ratio takes over.

So, if we took all splitters and spoilers off both cars, and forget about them, you still have aerodynamic drag. It more than likely, the Mustang has less aerodynamic drag.

Why would I think that? Because if it WERE truly DHOC vs. OVH, then the Mustang would have won the quarter mile. Why, because the whole "pulls more up top" would come into play as soon as you get "up top" in first gear. The rest of the gears are run in such a way that the RPM's stay "up top".

So, it's either gearing, or aero, or both. I am of the opinion, that both come into play.

Blades or no blades, the Mustang seems to have less drag considering the cars have just about equal HP, and gearing can keep you near peak HP. And at speeds over 100 MPH, almost all of your HP is fighting drag at that point.

AND that the drag increases with the square of the speed. So doubling the speed, quadruples the aerodynamic drag.

So, kudos to Ford for making the Mustang more aerodynamically efficient at high speeds...

[newmoon]

Originally Posted by Chadicus

No. The ZL1 1LE is a track car and probably 20k cheaper than the GT 500. The 500 better be seriously fast in a straight line or it will be a failure. And if it's close to 100k (ADM included) then it will compete with a ZR1 in which case fail.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ok let me get this straight. So if a vehicle marketed as a street vehicle and performs better in every aspect of street performance is a failure (anticipated 500). But a street vehicle that is marketed as a track vehicle that does not excel at anything street related is? LOL

So now the 500 has to be compared to the ZR1? I guess you are already anticipating what will happen in the ZL1 vs GT500 H2H comparison.

[Quinten_33]

Originally Posted by SSfriendly

If that were the case, then why has GM been talking about creating a stripped down 1SS with all season tires to compete with the GT? http://www.roadandtrack.com/new-cars...amaro-ss-base/

While the chevy small block may rule the roost with aftermarket options, the mustang is king of the hill with overall options. It’s been this way since the foxbody…perhaps longer. I’m not sure why you’d try to argue this, it’s common knowledge to most.

.

No, GM wants to make a less-expensive V8 Camaro to compete with the Challenger R/T. Having the least expensive V8 is a huge marketing point, as Dodge has proven time and time again. A $33,000 455hp v8 Camaro would sell like hotcakes if advertised on television. Buying a v8, alpha platform car for that price is a steal. And It needs those all-season tires to give the GT a chance at winning.